|
|
|
Ecclesiastical Case Reports
Re All Hallows, Harthill
(Sheffield Consistory Court: McClean Ch, January 2001)
Window - replacement - unlawful introduction
All Hallows Harthill is Grade I listed dating from the twelfth century. Burglars damaged a Victorian stained glass window. A modern window of modern design similar to another modern window in the church replaced the damaged Victorian window. No attempt had been made to comply with faculty jurisdiction. A confirmatory faculty was applied for. Five parishioners appeared as objectors. It became clear that the window had been replaced due to a misunderstanding between the parish architect who had in the past replaced one window with a modern design, and the lay vice-chairman of the PCC. The parish architect had obtained quotations both to repair the window and to replace the window. The PCC accepted the lower quotation without realising that it was the quotation to replace rather than to repair the window. In relation to the faculty itself the parishioners were split, the DAC positively recommended it, English Heritage opposed it, and the CCC advised the chancellor to grant the faculty. In considering whether to grant the faculty the chancellor considered Re St Michael and All Angels, Great Torrington [1985] Fam 81, [1985] 1 All ER 993, and Re St Stephen's, Walbrook [1987] Fam 146, [1987] 2 All ER 578. He accepted that 'pastoral considerations' are not the only considerations that need apply, and that he was bound to consider the application in the light of the usual considerations, in particular the idea of 'necessity' (citing with approval Re St Mary's, Banbury [1987] Fam 136, [1987] 1 All ER 247; Re All Saints, Melbourn [1992] 2 All ER 786, [1990] 1 WLR 833; and Re St Mary the Virgin, Sherborne [1996] Fam 63, [1996] 3 All ER 769). The chancellor ruled that there had been a genuine misunderstanding, and that the new window now formed part of a considered plan for the use of the north aisle. The increase in light was a 'need' in the sense identified by the authorities, and the change did not adversely affect the character of the church as a building of special architectural or historic interest. The confirmatory faculty was granted, half the costs to be borne by the parish architect who accepted that had there been no misunderstanding there would have been no need for a hearing.
[JG]
|
Search the Case Reports & Journals (issues 1 to 39) |
|
|
